Lancelot
Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: April 2002 |
|
Posted: Dec. 13 2017, 10:34 |
|
I listened the album again since a few month of pause, and I must say, sadly there is not really much left for me. Although the second half of the part II I still find quite beautiful, even moving sometimes, and there are also some nice moments in the part I, I feel the rest of the album just didn't stand the probe of the time.
Maybe this album sounds "cleared out", but for me not in a good way. It is somehow not deep enough. The weakest parts of RTO for me are those, when Mike tries to be so "aetheric" and so "ethnic", that the album almost becomes a parody of itself. (Like the begining or ending of Part I). And I just wonder often listening the album why and how Mike devised this idea of "pureness", "crystal clear" soundig? How did he come to the conclusion that "the more simple is the better"? Although this may work in the case of a couple of artists, I think in the case of Mike simpleness didn't come at all hand in hand with deepness - contrary, it made his albums more superficial.
Is this just the consequence of aging, and some kind of a sentimentalism that comes with that? Or is this just some kind of a laziness, tiredness, burning out effect? Or is this because of the abscence of collaborators, good musicians, and especially a good producer, who would say, "hey, stop here, the idea is great, but you can go much deeper?"
Though, to be fair, I am very happy that Mike still makes music. As far as there are few magic moments on an album, I am grateful to him. I just wish sometimes, I could feel again the cathartic moments that I felt when I was listening albums like Amarok. But then again... just like him, we had also aged and changed a lot, and those times, those emotions and those cathartic moments probably are gone forever now...
|